(August 27, 2017 at 9:08 pm)bennyboy Wrote:(August 27, 2017 at 8:59 am)Mathilda Wrote: I would define consciousness in terms of its functionality.The function of consciousness is to allow matter to subjectively experience what itself and its surroundings are like.
No that is what it does, that isn't the reason that consciousness developed. It is not unusual to define things in terms of their function. For example a flat bit of wood on some legs could either be a stool or a table. Or even a collection of binary electrical charges if used to depict a table or chair within computer game or simulation.
Sure we can define some things in terms of what they do, e.g. lightning, but some things cannot be unambiguously defined in that way, e.g. consciousness, emotions etc. Terms such as qualia and subjective cannot be defined unambiguously when talking about consciousness.
(August 27, 2017 at 9:08 pm)bennyboy Wrote: Evolution isn't an agent. It doesn't do things. It has no goals. At its most essential "evolution" is simply a term for what happens when you have a balance between material entropy and order such that some patterns persist over time and some do not.
I never once said otherwise. But I still feel that words like higher and advantage are applicable. Using the classic analogy of a ball rolling down a hill, yes, it is a neutral process that happens rather than the ball trying to reach a goal. But on the other hand, it is a process of minimising free energy and there are certain things that can be advantageous for example in finding the lowest spot on a landscape (e.g. a ball instead of a boulder, wind to blow it out of a low minima etc). Same with evolution. It is also a form of self organisation.
